Are the new PVP changes working as expected?

dr tinykittylove

CT1888 said:

Milk Jugz said:

Also, for anyone that noticed it's burned me out to the point that I'm spending less time on the forums too!!!!

Every cloud has a silver lining, eh?
(joke)

I hear ya- 10k season score for 198 season wins. Many rewards passed up on. Instead of burnt out, I'm just disheartened.

I'm somehow at 13k with 330 wins. 10 wins to go with 2 pvps left.  Yay. Go me. Something.

maguirenumber6

Bryan Lambert said:

PorkBelly said:

I get my 10cp and am done.  Usually puts me around 1k.  It's way too much effort for too little reward.

That seems pretty harsh. I have a tough time imagining a PvP system so horrible people would only play up to the 10CP reward and quit,

For most of the events, I've only been playing until 16 wins to get the 10CP, and then leaving it. I did go all the way up to 28 wins in one event, but only because the 3* being given as a prize (Squirrel Girl) gave me a legendary from her champ level. In the old format, I usually played up to 575 for the 10CP prize anyway, so on the whole, I've been playing it the same amount as I normally would have done (even though I might have needed fewer match wins in the old format to reach the 575 mark).

LordXberk

Spudgutter said:

LordXberk said:

Just adding my feedback in the hopes that someone is paying attention.  For perspective, I'm at day ~1000 and have several champed 5*s.   Top Gun was the first time in a looooong time I haven't gotten t10 in an event or reached top progression.  40 Wins is just too much time.  And, t10 for cp requires me scoring 2000+, which is insane.  Yes, before the changes, I'd often run scores up above 2000 for fun, but was never required to do it.  Now I have to in order to get t10 and it seems like a huge chore.  More work, same rewards - how is that for a quality of life improvement?  I am seriously considering going casual, dropping to a lower CL, doing 16 wins and never shielding.  Roster progress will slow w/o the 15cp; however, I'll spend less and have more free time.  #workingasintended

To be fair, how were they supposed to know you ran up past 2000 "for fun" in some events?  Is it possible that it took you close to 30-35 matches to get there?  Someone said that they were originally going to have the win count even higher, based on what people were already doing.  

Heck, a 2500 score, assuming 100 points from 3 seeds, and every match at 75 points, is 35 total matches. 

If they were just looking at match counts as a whole, they wont differentiate between 40 matches of a 5* roster having fun and a 3* transitioner scrambling for a much needed 4* cover at 900 points.

If they're just looking at matches won/played, they'd see that most times I'd play ~25 per PVP and occasionally I play 30+.  And, there is a big difference between choosing to run up my score for fun and being forced to play 40 matches against champed 5*s.  I also agree with Stax that the Ws needed to score 900 would be the appropriate comp, not my total win count.  Like I said, YMMV, but like many others, I feel that 40 Ws against all champ 5*s is a time suck and I've decided I will choose to go casual in many PVPs, play to 16 wins, and use no shields.  I would hope that the devs' goals weren't to disenchant their most loyal players and cause us to spend less, but that's what happening (at least from me).  

Spudgutter

Oh, dont get me wrong, i agree that 40 is too many, and that cp should still be in progression. I am just pointing out that people are upset with this change without looking at it as a whole.  There were some time slices where 900 could get you top 25 easily, knocking at the door to top 10.  And other slices where 900 maybe didnt even get you top 50.  It's entirely possible that for every higher end pvp player getting 30 matches in, there were several over 50.  Plus all of the mid level 3 and 4 star transitioners that were putting up that many just trying to hit 900. 

Spread it out over a few seasons, and the entire playerbase, i would not be surprised the "technical" average was 30+, keeping in mind they have absolutely no way to differentiate between people playing extra for fun.  Throw in that someone said in another thread that they put out a scrub team and retreat to reset the skip tax.  I can't even imagine how many people do that or how that would skew the numbers.

I know its been mentioned that they said on discord or something that the original number was over 40, but this is obviously unconfirmed. What i do know is that they did mention, i think in the "8 questions answered" thread awhile back that they did not like people coming in at the tail end of an event and hardly playing.  That the events were designed to be a certain length, and that they wanted engagement through the whole event.

Just because we got accustomed to playing the game a certain way, antithetical to the way of the designers intended, and they make a change to try to get that to line up, doesn't justify all of anger i see on the boards these days

A_Wise_Man

Spudgutter said:

Oh, dont get me wrong, i agree that 40 is too many, and that cp should still be in progression. I am just pointing out that people are upset with this change without looking at it as a whole.  There were some time slices where 900 could get you top 25 easily, knocking at the door to top 10.  And other slices where 900 maybe didnt even get you top 50.  It's entirely possible that for every higher end pvp player getting 30 matches in, there were several over 50.  Plus all of the mid level 3 and 4 star transitioners that were putting up that many just trying to hit 900. 

Spread it out over a few seasons, and the entire playerbase, i would not be surprised the "technical" average was 30+, keeping in mind they have absolutely no way to differentiate between people playing extra for fun.  Throw in that someone said in another thread that they put out a scrub team and retreat to reset the skip tax.  I can't even imagine how many people do that or how that would skew the numbers.

I know its been mentioned that they said on discord or something that the original number was over 40, but this is obviously unconfirmed. What i do know is that they did mention, i think in the "8 questions answered" thread awhile back that they did not like people coming in at the tail end of an event and hardly playing.  That the events were designed to be a certain length, and that they wanted engagement through the whole event.

Just because we got accustomed to playing the game a certain way, antithetical to the way of the designers intended, and they make a change to try to get that to line up, doesn't justify all of anger i see on the boards these days

But people scoring 2k weren't doing it to get a 4* cover.  To get to 900 winning 40 fights would mean an average of 22 points per battle.  Youd have to hit people the entire way with scores lower than yours.  
However, I will say this: anyone that was  scoring 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000 points before this change, you dont get to complain about it.  Every single pvp change that has made pvp more of a slog is directly related to *players* running up scores to the stratosphere.  That being said, knock it off if every change like this is going to *make you mad*.  Scoring that high is silly and pointless, and it leads to changes that make pvp more annoying. 

**Removed name calling and inappropriate language - Ducky

ZeroKarma

A_Wise_Man said:

Spudgutter said:

Oh, dont get me wrong, i agree that 40 is too many, and that cp should still be in progression. I am just pointing out that people are upset with this change without looking at it as a whole.  There were some time slices where 900 could get you top 25 easily, knocking at the door to top 10.  And other slices where 900 maybe didnt even get you top 50.  It's entirely possible that for every higher end pvp player getting 30 matches in, there were several over 50.  Plus all of the mid level 3 and 4 star transitioners that were putting up that many just trying to hit 900. 

Spread it out over a few seasons, and the entire playerbase, i would not be surprised the "technical" average was 30+, keeping in mind they have absolutely no way to differentiate between people playing extra for fun.  Throw in that someone said in another thread that they put out a scrub team and retreat to reset the skip tax.  I can't even imagine how many people do that or how that would skew the numbers.

I know its been mentioned that they said on discord or something that the original number was over 40, but this is obviously unconfirmed. What i do know is that they did mention, i think in the "8 questions answered" thread awhile back that they did not like people coming in at the tail end of an event and hardly playing.  That the events were designed to be a certain length, and that they wanted engagement through the whole event.

Just because we got accustomed to playing the game a certain way, antithetical to the way of the designers intended, and they make a change to try to get that to line up, doesn't justify all of anger i see on the boards these days

But people scoring 2k weren't doing it to get a 4* cover.  To get to 900 winning 40 fights would mean an average of 22 points per battle.  Youd have to hit people the entire way with scores lower than yours.  
However, I will say this: anyone that was  scoring 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000 points before this change, you dont get to complain about it.  Every single pvp change that has made pvp more of a slog is directly related to players running up scores to the stratosphere.  That being said, knock it off if every change like this is going to make you mad.  Scoring that high is silly and pointless, and it leads to changes that make pvp more annoying. 

Let's not conflate the issues here. The people hitting 2k plus every event really don't care about the 40 win requirement. It's extremely difficult to hit that kind of score without getting to 40 wins, and at 3k and above it's impossible to do so. 

There are essentially 3 camps involved. 

Camp 1 wasn't getting progression or placement. With the change they don't have to worry about getting hit, and they get all of the rewards minus the CP bonus, which they weren't hitting anyways. They like this change, it lets them play when they want and it is the reason that the change was made. To keep them engaged. Nothing to do with high scores, since they likely are not going to place T10 regardless. 

Camp 2 is the high-flying scorers that have made this a social game more than a competitive one. Their joy comes from playing with friends from around the world. They don't care about the 40 wins since they will get that regardless. They just don't want the CP removed from progression since it means there is a significant chunk of well-rostered veterans that will be shut out from the only really valuable resource in the game to them. 

Camp 3 is the group that starts late, makes prog and gets placement from later starting brackets. They don't want to play all of the time, but they have learned when to start PvP, grind it like crazy in a condensed period of time and get the resources they need. These folks still get the CP (most valuable), but they don't necessarily want to play for hours on end to get their progression rewards.

The first camp is cool with how things are set up, while camps 2 and 3 are less than excited about the change. The only way this works is if the engagement from the first group leads to additional sales, and it offsets people from 2 and 3 that walk away. The only problem is that the setup allows camp 1 to do this without ever having to shield, which means they don't need to spend money. 

And in the end, that's all the exercise is and ever will be. How can we get more money from people that aren't spending money (or bring new spenders in) without sacrificing the people that already are. It doesn't feel like this change hits that target, but I don't see the numbers either.

Personally, I think a better solution would be to offer bonus stores like some other games have. Rostered a character? Pay $20 to level them now! Get creative. 

Yoik

Only D3 really know what they intended. The move is certainly divisive. For me I’m missing out on the cp I was using to hoard or pull ( At 1,200 ). Unless I push for top10 which means more shielding and more hp spent.

 

I’m currently 10th with 2 hours left on my slice (S1) and im on 2,170 points…..47 wins. That’s almost a thousand points over what I would normally go to pre change.

 

Theory’s aside. Working as intended? They will have to tell us

bluewolf

A_Wise_Man said:

Spudgutter said:

Oh, dont get me wrong, i agree that 40 is too many, and that cp should still be in progression. I am just pointing out that people are upset with this change without looking at it as a whole.  There were some time slices where 900 could get you top 25 easily, knocking at the door to top 10.  And other slices where 900 maybe didnt even get you top 50.  It's entirely possible that for every higher end pvp player getting 30 matches in, there were several over 50.  Plus all of the mid level 3 and 4 star transitioners that were putting up that many just trying to hit 900. 

Spread it out over a few seasons, and the entire playerbase, i would not be surprised the "technical" average was 30+, keeping in mind they have absolutely no way to differentiate between people playing extra for fun.  Throw in that someone said in another thread that they put out a scrub team and retreat to reset the skip tax.  I can't even imagine how many people do that or how that would skew the numbers.

I know its been mentioned that they said on discord or something that the original number was over 40, but this is obviously unconfirmed. What i do know is that they did mention, i think in the "8 questions answered" thread awhile back that they did not like people coming in at the tail end of an event and hardly playing.  That the events were designed to be a certain length, and that they wanted engagement through the whole event.

Just because we got accustomed to playing the game a certain way, antithetical to the way of the designers intended, and they make a change to try to get that to line up, doesn't justify all of anger i see on the boards these days

But people scoring 2k weren't doing it to get a 4* cover.  To get to 900 winning 40 fights would mean an average of 22 points per battle.  Youd have to hit people the entire way with scores lower than yours.  
However, I will say this: anyone that was  scoring 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000 points before this change, you dont get to complain about it.  Every single pvp change that has made pvp more of a slog is directly related to *players* running up scores to the stratosphere.  That being said, knock it off if every change like this is going to *make you mad*.  Scoring that high is silly and pointless, and it leads to changes that make pvp more annoying. 

Implied in your post seems to be the belief that the high wins requirement is tied to an average of matches played, and that the high scores we see in some slices therefore mean many matches played, throwing the curve, and leading to our current requirement.  So if the super-scorers had taken it easy, we'd all be happier right now.

I would suggest that the developers are actually intelligent folks (I have see nothing to contradict that) and that, if you were devising a reward system based on matches played, you would use the average matches to each target.  BUT you would also throw out extreme outliers (like anyone trying to capture a true picture of actual activity across a broad population).  There are, for example, many (I suspect the majority of) players who probably play(ed) a few matches and stop, for whatever reason.  There is a pretty high(ish) ROI if you just join an event and play a couple matches - you get rewards for placement no matter if you play one match.  That probably makes sense for some players who have less time, just want some advancement, etc.  So it's hard to say without seeing numbers, but I'd bet that our wins requirement is based on the majority of players who hit certain reward targets and how many matches it took to achieve it.  I doubt they just averaged the numbers of matches played by all players and created a benchmark system from that curve.

As a 4* player who just started serious PVP this year (I think I hit max season progression in March-ish for the first time), I will say that I believe there were plenty of folks who would play 40 matches as they tried to rise through the zombie hoard in the last 3 hours of an event, to get the 4*.  I did it for a while before realizing that playing early and shielding was a lot smarter and less stressful (didn't always work).

That all said, every time I contemplate starting the events, the 40 wins just sounds like a lot of work and I need to convince myself to do it.  Based on activity, I'm far from alone.  This system just isn't fun.

The_A_Train

40 wins wouldn't be so bad if I wasn't competing against people that have rosters that are, seemingly, exponentially more powerful than mine. Competing against them for rewards is ridiculous and having to fight them, or better, having to waste ISO to skip them, is ludicrous. 40 wins wouldn't be an issue for me if the MMR scaling was fixed (or implemented? I think they forgot where the MMR button is...) 

Before the change I was just starting to hit 900+ regularly and I'm pretty certain I wasn't playing 40 matches to do it. I was also just outside of t10, so PvP was fun and rewarding. I might have spent more on skips or packs or boosts, but I was able to pick my fights, shield when needed and take the inevitable hits in stride. MMR was still an issue, but sometimes risking it for a high point fight was worth it. 

The change has taken the "pick your fight" option out of the mix, amplifying the MMR imbalance. In doing so, rewards have dramatically decreased, time spent...well, that's decreased, and the fun is almost gone. A well implemented MMR (match making rating) used to make good matches would be a massive quality of life upgrade. I don't mind shielding. I don't mind the extra playing. I don't even mind buying packs or boosts if the reward is good and I'm having fun; but my fun wall is normally around 15-20 wins when I start seeing 412 required 3*s & 390-420ish 4*s while my highest character for the event is the required 3* @ 380ish with not boosted 4*s.

Maybe it's working as intended...idk. I'll continue to play until I hit my fun wall and I'll use as few resources as necessary to get there while still maintaining minimums.